[Pete_Pittock]

  Tom Renli has escaped the Arizona heat and vacationing on the Oregon coast. We made arrangements to meet at Gearhart this morning. For me it was two reunions. Tom was a great companion, played a strong game but was undone by the short stick.
  Gearhart Golf Links was established in 1892, grew to 18 holes before WWI and was redone by H Chandler Egan in the 1930s. William G Robinson modernized the course in 1999.
http://www.gearhartgolflinks.com/
  My parents lived on the north coast for thirty years and GGL was my father's home away from home. We spend many an afternoon on the firm and fast fairways. The only irrigation was on tees, greens and the first fairway as a come-on to unsuspecting vacationers. I hadn't seen it for nearly twenty years.
  My compliments to Mr Robinson on his work. Although the course is green throughout, there does not appear to be any overwatering on the sand based fairways. For the most part the greens are still small and round with just enough contour to keep you entertained. About the same size greens as Astoria CC, which is 10 minutes up the coast.
  Recoverablity around the greens is at a premium with some pinching bunkers. Flat runoffs are now mounded which fits well into the scheme. Greens were true and stimp around 10.
  For those who remember the old course there are few changes. The marshy areas around 5 and 7 greens are now lakes. The sixth hole has been extended and doglegged right.
The 14th green was moved to the left into the dune which served the 15th tee and is now hidden. #15 shortened by about 40 yards and is now a wedge shot. Bunkering is more prominent yet retains the old character and fronting many greens. Large bunkers added to 12 and 13. Many trees have been eliminated, but the shore pines still have plenty of bite.
  It tips out at 6218, 71.6/137. Fourteen holes have N-S orientation, four E-W. Many fairways are mowed with less than 20 yards width. Two of the three par 3s (4,11)are 200+ and into the prevailing wind. One par five is reachable, another is 530 yards of crowned fairway, and the last is 585 into the prevailing wind, with an elevated green. Most 4s are 320-350, none exceed 400.
  If you are in the area it is $50 well spent dollars.

[Bill_McBride]

6218 yards, slope 137?  

That could be the most slope per yard of any course I've ever heard of.  137/6218 = .022

Anybody know a course with a higher slope / yard ratio?

[Tom Huckaby]

Bill- that's kid's stuff.

THE RANCH AT SILVER CREEK - San Jose, CA.

White tees:  139/5391 = .257
Blue tees:  147/5956 =  .246
Black tees:  152/6372 = .239

It really is an awfully difficult golf course, with the emphasis on awful.

[Chris_Blakely]

The Shattuck in New Hampshire

Back tees: 6764 Slope 153:  153/6764 = 0.0226

Middle tees: 6077 Slope 141:  141/6067 = 0.0232

[Garland Bayley]

Bill- that's kid's stuff.

THE RANCH AT SILVER CREEK - San Jose, CA.

White tees:  139/5391 = .257
Blue tees:  147/5956 =  .246
Black tees:  152/6372 = .239

It really is an awfully difficult golf course, with the emphasis on awful.

Tom,

How can we trust you and Chris when your math is so bad!  

[Chris_Blakely]

Sorry, forgot a decimal place.  I would say that falls under typo and  not bad math.  But that is just me.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Whoops - the math was correct, my transcribing from the calculator was obviously wrong.  Add a zero to each one.  This is correct (after rounding):

White tees:  139/5391 = .0257
Blue tees:  147/5956 =  .0246
Black tees:  152/6372 = .0239

The main point remains that the other courses are kid's stuff compared to the AWFULLY difficult Ranch.

 

[Garland Bayley]

Tom,

I have to fault your math again. Kid's stuff? You are talking about a difference in the third decimal place.

That is like a baseballer who is only hitting .250 is vastly inferior to one hitting .251.  

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland:

You can interpret this any way you like.  I'd say it's a pretty large difference given the relatively paltry numbers presented.. that is, the possible range in yards is pretty small, and the possible range of slopes is even smaller.  Thus each hundreth here is pretty meaningful.  I'll grant the thousandths are pretty irrelevant.

So just put it this way:  from the white tees, The Ranch is a 26 and Gearhart is a 22.  That's a significant difference.

TH

[Pete_Pittock]

Huck,
You may want to crunch your numbers again. Fact checked the ranch website. And its hard to discuss slope and ignore the course rating.
  Black  6747 72.9 152
  Blue   6389 71.3 147
  White 5808 68.9 139

  I was very suprised with the numbers at Gearhart. And it was Gearhardt before World War I. Factors must include greens which have about a 12 yard radius, and bunkers guard much of the entrance. Greenside recoveries require a delicate touch because of mounding.
 Oh, and the 200+ 3s, the longest 4 and the 585 yard uphill 18th all play into the prevailing wind.
#4 (206)plays into a cupped soft taco shell. I was about 5-8 yards short of the green, dead in line with the pin. After serious study of the shot I resigned myself to at best a 10 foot par saver. A ++ hole

#18 (585) may be one of the best par fives I have played and is probably architecturally untouched since Egan. Prevailing wind is into you from the left. Straight for 530 yds with trees (chip out 98% of time) and OB left. Coastal pines on the right. The green sits about 30 feet above and to the left on top of the primary dune and is surrounded on 3 sides by OB. Few level lies between 200 and 450 yards with natural heaving. Bunkers on the right menace the player seeking the best angle for the third shot. If you are in the center of the fairway or to the left probably will have to play over trees and OB. Two bunkers front the green. If you miss the green short or right you likely have a blind shot. Green has the most tilt of any on the course. The Sandtrap bar balcony beckons.

[Tom Renli]

Peter, thanks for posting and making the drive out - I really enjoyed the day.  Summary of my thoughts:

* Felt like I made eagle on the drive up the coast, 55 degree drop in temp from Scottsdale (117) to Gearhart 62.
* The two par threes back into the wind are as honest as you will find.
* Holes 11 through 14 are very good.  The hidden left pin on 14th is very interesting.
* Based on Peter's comments, the recent work has really improved the course.
* 18, which Peter discribed as a four and a half par earlier, is a challenging finish back into the wind.
* If you hit 12 or more greens, given their size and the breeze, you have really hit it well.
* Caught myself thinking what if several times - firmer conditions.  Growing out the fescue, between 1 and 9 fairway for example.

Other than not getting at some McBride money, all in all, a well spent $50 and enjoyable walk.  Cheers, Tom

[Tom Huckaby]

Peter:

The yardages on THE RANCH website are wholly fictitious; the dreams of someone trying to sell houses.  I know, I was on the team that did both the initial course rating and the 3 year follow-up.  It's just one of the several things to hate about this course:  false advertising as to yardages.  Use their scorecard at your own risk.

The true yardages are on the NCGA website.

http://www.ncga.org/courses/ranchon.php

 Men
Black               72        72.9     152      6372
Blue                 72        71.3     147      5956
White               70        68.9     139      5391

I'd demand an apology, but then again you had no way of knowing this, and you do provide great wine.

 

As for discussing slope and ommitting course rating, I'd agree.. but Bill just asked about yards per slope point.. and The Ranch is a "winner" there.  Still, 72.9 at only 6372 yards makes for a tough day for the scratch player too.

TH

[Pete_Pittock]

Huck,
I guess I had the retail yardage, not wholesale. Story of my life. That's as close as you'll get.

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck,
I guess I had the retail yardage, not wholesale. Story of my life. That's as close as you'll get.

That's more than I deserve.  

This Ranch place really is something, Peter.  Oh me oh my, what a golf course.  

TH

[David Davis]

Given there was some discussion as to the nature of Gearhart Golf Links and whether it was a true links course or not I decided to pay it a visit today during my short stay in Oregon.


My visit included some extensive discussions with staff, examination of turf and soil samples and a quick walk around to take photos and look at the course. It was beautiful fall day with sun and absolutely not a breath of wind.


Here are the facts: sand based ground, dunes land, fitting exactly into the traditional definition of a seaside links. "The link between the sea and the fertile ground. Check!


Greens, 100% poa, fairways, rye grass and some fescue thrown in.


As Pete already mentioned above the course is green, very green. According to their team there, this is how the members insist on having it. This is a pure maintenance issue. I'd argue the course is being maintained as a quasi parkland course from the perspective that they are trying to keep it green. It's much firmer than a typical parkland course (that's being maintained to be lush and green) at this moment. However, it could be far firmer with proper maintenance in the line with links courses. Plain and simple, too much water.


Even with sand based ground it's possible to have drainage issues. After all this course dates back to the late 1800's. Since Pete's visit they have installed irrigation, tough for me to judge whether this was a mistake or not. I lean in the direction of believing it was based on what I've seen.


They do have some drainage issues in certain areas throughout the course. This is due to a layer of organic build up/thatch about 2 feet under the surface. Perhaps it would be possible to help these issues out tremendously with deep hollow tining. It didn't sound like this was a practice they were doing in the past which could very well have prevented the drainage issues.


Make no mistake, Gearhart is a true links course. As Pete mentions above it has gentle undulation and overall adequate land for links golf. The greens may well have been renovated. Since I spoke to the staff before my walk around I didn't get to go back and ask that. They are relatively small, well mown small and circular. I didn't see too much in terms of excitement as far as the greens were concerned. There were several that seemed to have bowls but the surrounding humps which I'd guess were built in as part of a renovation are unnatural and could be greatly improved. They could also mow that grass even lower which would increase playability options around the greens.


Here are some photos to give an idea of what the course is like:


green surface - poa (greens in excellent shape and running fast, I guess 10-11!)














[size=78%]





















































Please note there is no real order to the photos as I walked the course in sections and then drove down the road to walk into the other areas.


The last photos are of the most undulated and dynamic portion of the site. There seems to be a couple rather quirky holes there that were of the most interest to my eye. Plus a couple nice looking par 3's.


I'd say a Doak 4 but if it's really firmed up then a Doak 5 if it's located in UK or Ireland. However, given the fact that there are but a couple of true links courses in the US I'd highly recommend a day spent at Gearhart and Astoria. It would truly be a rare day in the US and if it's in the summer and everything is really dry then it would be the cheapest way to get a feeling for true links golf in US you are going to find. [/size]

[Garland Bayley]

I played here last November. The rain in the Pacific northwest increases from next to nothing in summer to a maximum in December and January. So it was approaching the wettest time of the year. September is just out of the driest time of the year.


My drives were getting no more roll out than they do at my clay based home course in the Portland area. I finally hit a drive downwind that would land on a down slope that I fully expected to roll out some. I was shocked to find the following when I reached the ball.





The ball is less than a yard from its landing spot. I get better results on my home course. I don't know about thatch two feet down as David inhibiting the drainage as being the problem. To me it seems there is just too much soft loam at the surface.


I just returned from Ireland. No links course there even came close to having a problem like this even though it rained some everyday at the beginning. I played on a morning after a deluge leaving standing water in places. Still the ball bounced and rolled extensively.


I had one ball embed on landing at Gearhart. How can a course be a true links course when this lack of links turf exists throughout the course.

[Garland Bayley]

I took this photo of a bank just off the edge of the course.





It appears to me that the top foot or so of soil in the area where the course is build is a fairly heavy loam. It would seem to me (not an expert, but best guess) stripping that level off would give you a fully sandy base for the course.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()